Just so you know, my notation doesn't drop the number in the list of numbers. It's just a way of writing down the votes quickly so I can calculate it. X=10, N=Not Applicable (Vote on own map). Hence, you drop the N and lowest score, add all the others, then divide by the number of votes added. I encourage you all to check my math to make sure I calculated things properly.

You matched every single one of my calculations except for Aqua Caves and Poloy Forest, and those two's scores only differed by 0.08 and 0.09 points respectively. I don't remember Aqua Caves getting two fours.

I really don't think that is an accurate description of Glaber syndrome. It is just the style you made your maps. It is not the fact that you try to port the levels. I think it was the most popular since that one contest where you made so many match maps that were pretty much the same, and how low quality they were.

Thompson hasn't been mapping for a long time so I don't think he was known for only ports. I definitely saw some potential from the start, even though it might have been in the wrong direction at points.

Some ports are fine, as long as it is within the limits of SRB2's engine. The engine doesn't automatically make a level bad; it is how you approach it. I think ports can be a good beginner tool to let you gain ideas from new levels.

Yeah, and the 7.00 score you got clearly shows that you can make much better levels than what are in Sonic 06.

I consider 7.00 as "playable and enjoyable map". i.e., a map that accomplishes its function as a place for a game to take place and is worthy to be played again. Then, you map is approved. In my opinion, 7 is the lowest score that a decent map must receive. 5 is just a map that worked.

Well at least I'm getting more information regarding on how Glaber Syndrome is precieved in the SRB2 Community.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Torgo

Some ports are fine, as long as it is within the limits of SRB2's engine. The engine doesn't automatic make a level bad, it is how you approach it. I think ports can be a good beginner tool, to let you gain ideas from new levels.

Some of My GS level actually fall under this, believe it or not. This even includes my first release, Spiral Mountain.

You seemed to have missed my point about Glaber syndrome. The syndrome is making bad maps period. It is hard to pinpoint what made those maps bad, but it seems to be similar problems. I think that is part of the reason why the term was made.

I want to help you on your maps, I really do. That is why I bring up this argument so that you can understand what we meant about Glaber syndrome and why the term should be not something to strive for. Now, since that time when you made all those match maps, you have improved a bit. Until you realize that Glaber syndrome isn't just referring to the porting of stages, but how you make those stages, you will not improve on your mapping style to the full potential. Try to look on what you did wrong on a mapping level, not on the concept level.

So the first definition was right. GS maps to here are like 1994 (or worse) maps to the Doom community. Now if this is still wrong, don't correct me. Under this impression I will seek to make my levels better than a mere confusing port or level as bad as Battle Woods the series.

Honestly, I suggest you stop and take a step back and look at what your maps have. Then I want you to look at other people's maps, the ones that are considered good and bad, and SEE what works and what doesn't. You keep using the same horrible techniques over and over again. In particular:

Your maps have no flow. This contest entry is a perfect example of this. It's horrible in this regard and completely unenjoyable as a result. You have many other great examples of stages that are just terrible because the player constantly is stopping dead for no good reason other than the level forces them to.

Your maps have no direction to them. So many of the maps in this contest used arrows to point in the right direction, which isn't a particularly good method but it works better than what you're doing. If you take the natural choice in the path in this map of yours, you are thrown BACKWARDS in the stage. You can take this stage and basically turn it into a game of opening doors. If you open the right door, you get to continue, if you open the wrong door you're thrown back several doors and have to do a whole bunch of stuff all over again.

That's not fun or anything remotely resembling a good stage. Basically none of your stages are. I really suggest you read http://wiki.srb2.org/wiki/Level_Design_101 and find the rules you're breaking, because it's frequently different things you're screwing up each time, but they're all listed on that page.

VVZ has a curse!? I didn't knew about that. What I know about it is that it's an oldbie joke made for newbs to do impossible things to get to that zone that, until now, doesn't exist, like flying over 3 times to that ring circle in GFZ1 without taking one of the rings.

__________________
Visual Basic is the language of people who want to create stuff out of nothing and then point that stuff to nothing so that nothing gets done.
Java... well, it can make Coffee objects at a rate of order n, but I don't drink coffee... Eclipse ftw!

No, a month ago Vibrant Vendetta was a stupid recurring forum joke. Now it's an above average stage. I don't see the issue with this. It's certainly not worth creating another retarded Tails Doll curse.